I started, but didn't finish some podcast, wherein the guest claimed that (real-life) vampires
exemplify how good some strange subcultures can be. He was arguing that the vampire he allowed to
suck his blood not only was "very clean" and such, but the local vampires do a lot of
charity work, etc. The podcast is supposed to be about "transformative choice" or
somesuch, where you make (what I guess is) an irreversible choice ... e.g. in the fictional lore,
becoming a vampire.
But this seems like more ideal hooey to me. There are no such acute inflection points. There
is only the steady lean this way and that. It's the same with losing this spare tire around
my waist ... long, slow commitment to evidence-based methods. If there are
"attractors" with steep, inescapable walls, I don't know what they are. But maybe
that's why I'm bald? Maybe as an adolescent child, I made the *choice* to be bald? >8^D
And all I need to do is find a subculture to help pull me out of the male-pattern-baldness
attractor?
On 1/10/22 10:20, Marcus Daniels wrote:
Dave writes:
< There is a ton of interesting research on this topic that is generally ignored: by the
christian right because it dares to mention sex and sexuality, by the scientific community
because it is not "scientific," and by the 'woke' because it challenges their
narrative and offends their sensibilities. >
I think people underestimate how much they are who they are just based on developmental,
cultural considerations, and inertia. I claim that "I was born this way" is a
defense against the cultural attractor; thus, that it can become necessary for minorities
to stick together with identity politics. To assert their freedom and say that their
identity could be flexible is to threaten the safety of the group, and so the group
polices against that messaging.
Marcus
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> on behalf of Prof David West
<profw...@fastmail.fm>
*Sent:* Monday, January 10, 2022 9:25 AM
*To:* friam@redfish.com <friam@redfish.com>
*Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] gene complex for homosexuality
Buddhism (mostly the Theravada branch) recognizes four sexes: male, female,
hermaphrodite, and anaphrodite. Hermaphrodite does not mandate dual sexual apparatus and
the category includes: gays, transsexuals, cross-dressers, some variations of bisexuals,
and, most famously, the Thai kathoeys or "lady boys."
Kathoeys are fully recognized within Thai society. Although they are required
to participate in the military draft lottery, they are officially exempt from
service. You will find kathoeys working in almost every profession, openly and
without discrimination. Kathoey prostitutes are ubiquitous, especially in
Bangkok and other tourist areas.
Why are kathoeys kathoey? Not because of genes as is the wont in Western science, but
because their body is simultaneously hosting both a male and female "spirit."
(A deep exploration of the 4 Buddhist sex categories is needed to fully explain this.) A
kathoey has 'access' to both of the spirits in his (yes this is the accepted and proper
pronoun) body.
In a deeply spiritual culture like Thai Buddhist culture, a kathoey is
therefore a very 'auspicious' and honored being.
A close approximation to Kathoey is the Navajo concept of a Nádleehi. The
Cheyenne also recognized an official social role — the berdache that is
similar. (You saw one in the movie /Little Big Man/). But a berdache is
probably more of a response to the Cheyenne 7-year postpartum sex-with-a-woman
taboo.
There is a ton of interesting research on this topic that is generally ignored: by the
christian right because it dares to mention sex and sexuality, by the scientific
community because it is not "scientific," and by the 'woke' because it
challenges their narrative and offends their sensibilities.
davew
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022, at 7:56 AM, glen wrote:
> Right. I hope that's the case, not merely that some of us are more
> plastic, but that perhaps any of us could even practice being more
> plastic. But that's just hope ... hope can be debilitating.
>
> On 1/10/22 07:50, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>> I meant that some people are genetically set up to be more plastic and
dynamic than others, and one way this manifests itself is in sexual preference. If
one finds a genetic signature for homosexuality, it could just be the deeper thing.
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com <mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>> on behalf
of glen <geprope...@gmail.com <mailto:geprope...@gmail.com>>
>> *Sent:* Monday, January 10, 2022 8:25 AM
>> *To:* friam@redfish.com <mailto:friam@redfish.com> <friam@redfish.com
<mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] gene complex for homosexuality
>> One of the themes I've seen talks about a slight correlation between the
presence of homosexuality in a family with female fecundity (counter intuitive to
those who talk about homosexuals having children). Another theme is that it's largely
epigenetic; I suppose a slightly deeper in mechanism than Jochen's hormonal
proposition.
>>
>> Both of those appeal to my sense that evolution doesn't separate lineage from
ontogeny. There's no crisp line between organism and family, no crisp line between families,
species, generations, or anything else, which approaches SteveS' third point. The selection is
as "fractal" as the crinkly space in which it arises.
>>
>> I wish I were as libertarian as Marcus in this context, where we're all
ideally plastic and dynamic. But my sense is not only that historicity and
accumulation outstrip any plasticity, at least by our mid 30s or so, but also that
there's no place for will or intention in most feelings of orientation. It seems
people often feel fated or even trapped by their orientation. If it's plastic at all,
its trajectory is at least chaotic, not amenable to reverse engineering. But, as
Jochen points out, we're much less likely to engage in every speculation we could
because it's such a sensitive topic.
>>
>> Thanks for all the ideas.
>>
>> On 1/9/22 08:30, Steve Smith wrote:
>>> A couple of things as yet not obviously (to me) introduced into this
discussion:
>>>
>>> 1) Survival of the Fittest might better be Legacy Survival of the Fittest. Evolution
depends on successful *reproduction* and in fact, a string of successful reproductions. I have a number of
childless friends who came from parents with large families... but who only had 2 or fewer siblings
themselves and have few if any nieces and nephews. Their grandparent's "fecundity" has officially
petered out. I'm not saying this is a good nor a bad thing, just a break in the "survival of the
fittest" and an illustration that simply being good at spawning lots of children isn't enough... they
have to survive and then reproduce themselves, rinse, repeat.
>>>
>>> 2) Heredity/Evolotion 101 in college made the point that the "selfish"
gene for men suggests that one's nieces and nephews by a maternal sister are (closer to)
guaranteed to share 1/4 of his genes than the (best case) 1/2 for his own (presumed) children
(worst case 0%). The same (almost) logic applies to women who are childless (for whatever
reason)... their sister's children are a genetic legacy for them. Entirely anecdotally, many of
the (childless) gay men and women I know are pretty good aunts and uncles... (though this can be
explained many ways).
>>>
>>> 3) And of course, the object of heredity has shifted from the Gene to something
much larger, more fuzzy, and perhaps (much) more interesting? What *cultural* traits might be
positively correlated with being homosexual or more aptly ambi/bi/pan/poly sexual? It is no
longer exclusively the case that being gay deals you out of being a parent (raising adopted
children, en-vivo, en-vitro fertilization, etc), so one's contribution can be to a continued
*cultural* or *memetic* legacy of a "way of being" which is very Lamarckian.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/9/22 3:15 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
>>>> This topic is a minefield, because it is related like the controversial
"race" term to the personal identify. Black people for instance score higher in 100m or
200m runs than white people as the data clearly shows, which means their genes somehow must give
them more power for this particular competition. Still all people belong to the same race. As you
know this topic is very controversial and precarious. For sex it is similar.
>>>>
>>>> There are genes for the two major sex hormones, estrogen for women and
testosterone for men. Males have one X and Y chromosome, females have two X chromosomes.
Therefore there are clearly genetic differences between men and women.
>>>>
>>>> Just how girls who are subject to estrogen develop an affection for boys is
unclear. The same for boys who are subject to testosterone in their development. My hypothesis is
that the mechanism works like "develop an affection for those who look the same but
different" during the time the sex hormones start to work. Once they have a preference,
addiction mechanisms kick in which tell the individuals to do more of that which they like. Something
like that where the target of affection is path dependent and not completely hardwired.
>>>>
>>>> In general I would say that homosexuality is a byproduct of the mating
process. This would explain why homosexuality continues to exist in evolutionary systems
although these individuals have less or no offspring. Like coal power plants which produce
CO2 and nuclear power plants which produce nuclear waste, the mating process produces
losers who lost for whatever reason in the competition for mates and have no offspring.
Among those some may pick a mate of the same sex, because the sex drive is hard to ignore
and not completely hardwired.
>>>>
>>>> This is just my rough idea how it could work in principle. It can be
wrong and it is a delicate topic. There are many books about the sociologal and
psychological aspects of it. In the library I usually ignore them because it is not a topic
I am especially interested in. Therefore my knowledge is incomplete in this area, and
someone else here can probably explain it better.
>>>>
>>>> -J.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------- Original message --------
>>>> From: thompnicks...@gmail.com <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com>
>>>> Date: 1/9/22 01:39 (GMT+01:00)
>>>> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' <friam@redfish.com
<mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] gene complex for homosexuality
>>>>
>>>> Well, first things first. Is there any evidence for a genetic basis for
homosexuality. You can, of course, have a trait that it is chromosomally determined (if
not genetically so) and still not heritable. Sex, for instance. Sex is not heritable.
>>>>
>>>> My assumption has always been that homosexuality might be influence by
innate factors, but not be heritable.
>>>>
>>>> I haven’t read up on that subject for 2 decades.
>>>>
>>>> Anybody know any facts?
>>>>
>>>> n
>>>>
>>>> Nick Thompson
>>>>
>>>> thompnicks...@gmail.com <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com> <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com
<mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com> <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/>
<https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/>>
<https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/>
<https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com
<mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>> *On Behalf Of *Marcus Daniels
>>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 8, 2022 5:57 PM
>>>> *To:* FriAM <friam@redfish.com <mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] gene complex for homosexuality
>>>>
>>>> It seems like such a dumb question to ask. Why should any preference
have a genetic basis? How about look for a gene that encodes a preference for plush
carpeting or a preference for Flamenco music? And what about those men that like short
women?! Maybe a man is kind of like a tall woman, on average? And why would anyone
expect that it would be bimodal? If it were what would that tell us? One could imagine
homosexuality is just one manifestation of cognitive or emotional flexibility. That by
itself would explain why it is enduring, because those properties would give a person an
advantage over less flexible people. Some fraction of the people with that property have
heterosexual or bisexual relationships, and they reproduce and raise children that thrive.
The rigid (heterosexual) types in comparison are prone to making the same kind of mistakes
over and over and their children suffer for it.
>>>>
>>>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> *From:*Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com <mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>> on behalf
of ⛧glen <geprope...@gmail.com <mailto:geprope...@gmail.com>>
>>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 8, 2022 4:13 PM
>>>> *To:* FriAM <friam@redfish.com <mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
>>>> *Subject:* [FRIAM] gene complex for homosexuality
>>>>
>>>> I'm in an ongoing argument with a gay friend about how tortured Darwinian arguments are in
accounting for homosexuality. He claims they're VERY torturous. I'm inclined toward the first mentioned here:
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26089486 <https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26089486>
<https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26089486 <https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26089486>>
>>>>
>>>> But, were group selection and/or cultural evolution a thing, then my
friend would be more right. Anyone here have a strong opinion?
>>>>
--
glen
Theorem 3. There exists a double master function.
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:
5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
